Contents

About the List

The purpose of this list

It is to narrow down the possibilities for true seekers who really want to know if there is a true religion out there. This means you won't have to consider as many options in your search :-).

This is definitely one way in which religions can be tested as far as truth value. Often critics of religions will generalize and say all religions are incapable of being tested for falsity, but this is not true. I am not claiming this is the only way to check for falsity, but this is certainly one way in which we can invoke scientific principles.

What this list demonstrates

What is demonstrated here is that a religion is not even worthy of being considered if it does not have at least one completely transcendent deity.

Not only must a deity in that religion be transcendent, but all deities responsible for the creation of the universe/world must be transcendent.

Scenario religions that are incompatible

No deities are transcendent.

1 or more deities are transcendent, but have no known part in creation.

Multiple deities are responsible for creation. Most or some are transcendent beings. If one co-creator deity is not a transcendent being, then the religion is incompatible.

The argument

In science, there is a law entitled, Conservation of mass. In simple terms this law says that matter cannot be created or destroyed, but it can be rearranged. Similarly with energy and momentum. This is reflected in these quotes from NASA's website:

“

Conservation of mass - NASAThe conservation of mass is a fundamental concept of physics along with the conservation of energy and the conservation of momentum. Within some problem domain, the amount of mass remains constant--mass is neither created nor destroyed. This seems quite obvious, as long as we are not talking about black holes or very exotic physics problems. The mass of any object can be determined by multiplying the volume of the object by the density of the object. When we move a solid object, as shown at the top of the slide, the object retains its shape, density, and volume. The mass of the object, therefore, remains a constant between state "a" and state "b."[1]

”

“

Conservation of energy - NASAThe conservation of energy is a fundamental concept of physics along with the conservation of mass and the conservation of momentum. Within some problem domain, the amount of energy remains constant and energy is neither created nor destroyed. Energy can be converted from one form to another (potential energy can be converted to kinetic energy) but the total energy within the domain remains fixed.[2]

”

“

Conservation of momentum - NASAThe conservation of momentum is a fundamental concept of physics along with the conservation of energy and the conservation of mass. Momentum is defined to be the mass of an object multiplied by the velocity of the object. The conservation of momentum states that, within some problem domain, the amount of momentum remains constant; momentum is neither created nor destroyed, but only changed through the action of forces as described by Newton's laws of motion.[3]

The universe is eternal. The problem with this is that scientists almost unanimously agree that the universe had a beginning. Whatever you want to call it, whether it be Big Bang or something else, it had a beginning of some sort.

We are in one amongst several universes. The problem with this is that it would seem the mother-universe, or the universe that all the universes are within, would need to be material. And you would run into the problem of it not being able to create itself again.

Sentient, material being(s) caused it into existence. The problem with this is that we know from the above laws that material things/beings cannot create or destroy other material things. A practical example, it would be like creating yourself. A material being, as we know it, cannot exist in a non-material universe.

Sentient, non-material being(s) caused it into existence. This is most likely, because it is being(s) that exist outside the limitations of natural laws, or laws that govern the material universe that we live in. Therefore, religions that support this view are not scientifically invalid.

For our purposes these laws should be clarified. Matter, energy, and momentum cannot be created or destroyed by other matter, energy, or momentum. Theoretically though, something or someone who was immaterial, did not consist of energy, and had no momentum as we understand it could create or destroy such things.

The list

According to the reasoning laid out above, the following religions are scientifically compatible with regard to the three scientific laws of conservation mentioned.

Religions that do not qualify

In general it doesn't seem like it is compatible, but there may be a denomination of Buddhism that is. More research is needed. Right now anyways it appears there really isn't any deity that didn't start in a material form of existence. It is all about reaching Nirvana, and the "Buddha" is simply someone that has already attained it. That means that at one point they were just a regular individual.

More research is needed on this religion as well. It seems in general though, that most Hindus are trying to attain the knowledge that they are really one with the supreme being, but in actuality there is no supreme being because everyone is the supreme being. Therefore the supreme being is a material.